re:Virtual package: postscript-preview
- To: debian-devel@Pixar.com
- Subject: re:Virtual package: postscript-preview
- From: "brian (b.c.) white" <bcwhite@bnr.ca>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:56:00 -0500
- Message-id: <"19156 Fri Jan 12 13:56:31 1996"@bnr.ca>
>> If two packages provide "postscript-preview", will it be considered a
>> conflict? If so, then this might not be a good idea. There may be
>> cases where people want two different postscript viewers on their machine.
>
>It was my understanding that the provides field was created specificaly
>so that more than one package could provide a feature, thus releaving
>depends from having to specify multiple package dependance when really
>only one feature needed to be supplied.
This is my understanding, too, and it makes complete sense in the case
where there can logically only be one present at a time. Sendmail/Smail
is a perfect example with the "mail-transport-agent" virtual package.
But when it comes to packages that provide the same functionality but
can peacefully coexist, what then? The best example for this might be
a virtual package of the name "editor". I use emacs, but if somebody
who shares my machine (or my /usr mount, for that matter) wants to use
vi, then both could not provide the virtual package "editor" if it
will cause a conflict. The same goes for multiple postscript viewer
packages.
If virtual packages are going to be used for the purpose you suggest
(and I think they should be), then there must be a way to specify that
a virtual package is supplied non-exclusively so that other packages
can also supply the same virtual package without conflicting.
Brian
( bcwhite@bnr.ca )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not.
Reply to: